Bug#496598: marked as done (fix for #494466 causes netinst to fail)
Your message dated Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:50:18 +0200
with message-id <200808260850.19495.elendil@planet.nl>
and subject line Re: Bug#496598: fix for #494466 causes netinst to fail
has caused the Debian Bug report #496598,
regarding fix for #494466 causes netinst to fail
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
496598: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=496598
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: base-installer
Version: 1.94
Severity: serious
hey,
HP QA reported an issue with the most recent netinst builds for i386
and amd64. Their report follows:
*********
New lenny builds of 24th Aug – both amd64 and i686 bit failed during
installing the base system leading to installtion incomplete.
SYSTEM CONFIGURATIONS:
Server: BL480c and DL365G5
Operating System: Debian – Lenny amd64/i686 – netinstaller – 24th Aug Build
Boot Controller: Smart Array P400i and E200i
Network Controller: 373i
STEPS TO REPRODUCE THE PROBLEM:
1. Select option - Install
2. Install the base system
3. After completing 79% of installation , the following error occurs
The target file system contains files from a past
installation. These files could cause problems with the
installation process and if you proceed, some of the existing
files may be overwritten.
Proceed with installation to unclean target? Yes or No
4. When selected either, the step 2 restarts and the same error occurs
when completes 79%.
*********
I was able to reproduce this, and it appears to haev been introduced
by the fix for #494466. I added 'set -x' into bootstrap-base postinst,
and saw this[1] in syslog. To help verify, I retried the install w/
base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy=most on the cmdline and
the install completed w/o issue.
[1]
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + break
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + [ initramfs-tools = initramfs-tools ]
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + db_get base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + _db_cmd GET base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + IFS= printf %s\n GET base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + IFS=
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): read -r
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: _db_internal_line
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + RET=10 base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy doesn't exist
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + return 10
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + db_input medium base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + _db_cmd INPUT medium base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + IFS= printf %s\n INPUT medium base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + IFS=
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): read -r _db_internal_line
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + RET=10 "base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy" doesn't exist
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + return 10
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + true
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + db_go
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + _db_cmd GO
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + IFS= printf %s\n GO
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + IFS=
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): read -r _db_internal_line
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + RET=ok
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + return 0
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + db_get base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + _db_cmd GET base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + IFS= printf %s\n GET base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + IFS=
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): read -r _db_internal_line
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + RET=10 base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy doesn't exist
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: (process:506): + return 10
Aug 25 23:14:35 main-menu[1006]: INFO: Menu item 'bootstrap-base' succeeded but requested to be left unconfigured.
--
dann frazier
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tuesday 26 August 2008, dann frazier wrote:
> I was able to reproduce this, and it appears to haev been introduced
> by the fix for #494466. I added 'set -x' into bootstrap-base postinst,
> and saw this[1] in syslog. To help verify, I retried the install w/
> base-installer/initramfs-tools/driver-policy=most on the cmdline and
> the install completed w/o issue.
Problem is a version mismatch between bootstrap-base (1.93) and
base-installer (1.94). This is just the usual "arch all versus arch any"
breakage one can expect in unstable.
Will fix itself with next images.
Cheers,
FJP
--- End Message ---
Reply to: